[FRIENDinDEED]

I just got out of an exhausting back ond forth on another thread here specifically about whats important about breeding in regard to the breeding process.

I have a myriad of issues with the whole "breeding/seed" scene overall. from what Ive seen the state of it is a complete monkey hustle; strains aren't stable, prices are ridiculous, customer service is shit and no one is stepping up the standards for any of it from what I read and see on here.

heres my take on breeding overall: I think that breeding isn't about just popping a whole bunch of seeds and having a "scratch and sniff" orgy to see who stinks the best along with ogling plants for something that is supposedly/mysteriously supposed to pop out at you. there are so many other aspects that breeders don't mention doing and they should; if breeding is the great science that ppl claim it to be then why aren't most breeders talking about the other steps in the scientific process that or just as, if not, more important than "stock selection"? with the possibility of pheno variation at the turn of every popped seed then why aren't there other selections methods being relied upon?

I would think that if one is breeding plants and looking for good/descent genetics that THC/CBD levels of the plants being used for breeding should be taken into account for a complete and overall breeding process. I don't know if this is done or not but for example:

say I pop 30 plants in hellacious facility that I have; I claim 20 females and take cuts from each one, flower them out and test the end product after dried and cured properly, once dried/cured properly I test for THC/CBD levels and choose a worthy female or male that way and I say male as well because don't male plant produce THC/CBD levels of their own? although the levels are significantly lower than female plants they are still present so shouldn't they be tested as well as a factor since it actually is a valid factor and can have an effect on the end result via seed produced? if your a serious breeder shouldn't you want your values to be rated/tested for optimal production of end product , that product being the THC/CBD levels to see how strong or weak a plant is or could be?

so I wanted to see what others think about the breeding/seed scene these days and where you think its going. should the standards be better? is there a better way to find keepers for breeding purposes other than the "age old"? how reliable is the "f1-s2 two step" that ppl seem to rely on to get their breeding stock and deem genetics worthy? I believe in no stone being unturned so do we automatically rule out bag seeds "just because"?

ppl tell me that im an internet thug and I still don't know what that means, I guess im just too immersed in reality to take any of this internet shit that serious; and yes I cuss like a drunken sailor, and could care less about your feelings so I want some serious shit to be said here

whats your take on it all?

[bombadil.360]

hello,

lets say you take samples of those supposed 20 females and other X amount of males for lab testings, and you get wonderful results.

however, this does not translate as capacity for these individuals to pass on their specific traits to their progeny in a consistent way.

to see whether an individual is able to pass on its desired traits to the progeny, you need to test in different ways than simply measuring thc/cbd levels at a lab.

you have a couple avenues to do that; you can go with the selfing method that Tom champions, which is pretty efficient in terms of time needed to see up to what point an individual is able to pass on its traits.

or you can go the normal male/female route, which will take you longer to determine at what % of consistency a mom and dad is able to pass on its desired traits.

what makes a breeder a good breeder is not much which of these method he chooses to use, or whether he uses both; but rather, his complete understanding of how things actually work, and the honesty in accepting the limitations imposed on us by nature.

you cannot just decide what to breed for, for example, you can only observe which desired traits a given population has to offer, and try to see if you can manage to produce a population that produces acceptable homogenous offspring carrying the observed desired traits.

a point which by the way, is not understood very well. due to hubris mainly.

peace

[bombadil.360]

and to add: a lab result indicating high thc content does not necessarily translates as well balanced herb in terms of high.

there are very many variables in the equation that determines what is an overall good cultivar or clone-only specimen.

such as: ceiling, type of high, taste, lung expansion, psyche-activity, narcotic/pain relief, inspirational, etc...

the overall chemical profile is more important than just how high or low a given sample tests in a lab for thc %.

peace

[30years]

hi,
labs do help quite a bit. as the breeder you still have to have an idea of what you are trying to achieve but now we may use lab testing as a view into the hidden chemical aspects of the plant. it speeds up development time for sure. the lab does not replace your vision but it is a nice pair of glasses to help see more clearly.
best,
30y

[VerdantGreen]

there has already been a thread that discussed this whole subject in some detail.

the 'everyone a breeder?' thread contained some rudeness, arguing and sh1t talking, but MOST IMPORTANTLY it contained a whole lot of knowledge that would be invaluable to anyone who wanted to practice plant breeding as responsibly as their situation allowed.

for some some reason, despite the valuable information that the thread contained, it got deleted.

imo deleting that thread was robbing the cannabis community of a valuable resource. and for a website that is supposed to champion cannabis knowledge, it is inexplicable and irresponsible.

VG

all breeding projects should start with a defined goal. that goal can be marketability, potency, a particular growth characteristic, or maybe just something new.

these decisions are entirely dependent on the user or the end use.

first and foremost, you should understand, you aren't a master breeder nor will you be for a LONG time (i don't say this disrespectfully. a LOT of people are intimidated about breeding and it keeps people from taking the first step). with that out of the way, just have fun. try what works and what doesn't. allow yourself to make a few mistakes (that's how the best things happen). you will learn more from your own experiences than you would from any advice for the simple fact that people's opinions are fragmented and based on their own experiences. never consider yourself a master and always consider yourself a student. unless you intend to open a seed business, you should focus on breeding what works for you.

if your goal IS to open a seed business, you should focus on making stable strains that can be duplicated and replicated. in this day and age, people want strains tailored to specific effects or qualities. i wish more breeders would focus on making new strains that cater to specific ailments or effects instead of trying to make a new diesel or OG knockoff. i wish there was more diversification in the gene pool and more breeders worked landraces back into these poly-hybrids...but i digress.

the key to breeding great strains is to use stable strains as parents. select for qualities that appeal to you and then use those original parents to backcross until you get a stable strain that produces a consistent seed. rinse, repeat.

[Morphote]

Originally Posted by VerdantGreen

there has already been a thread that discussed this whole subject in some detail.

the 'everyone a breeder?' thread contained some rudeness, arguing and sh1t talking, but MOST IMPORTANTLY it contained a whole lot of knowledge that would be invaluable to anyone who wanted to practice plant breeding as responsibly as their situation allowed.

for some some reason, despite the valuable information that the thread contained, it got deleted.

imo deleting that thread was robbing the cannabis community of a valuable resource. and for a website that is supposed to champion cannabis knowledge, it is inexplicable and irresponsible.

VG

I think the people that needed to see that information were paying attention at the time. Thanks again Tom for taking the time to spread the knowledge/information. I particularly enjoyed the exchange with GMT. That, along with the link to ebay, was pure gold. (Note: Tom advised using a ratio of 3:9 rather than the 1:9 that is recommended by BudResearch.com).

M.

Originally Posted by TomHill

Please let x = .9999...

then 10x = 9.9999....

subtract left sides and right sides of the equations

10x = 9.9999...
- x = .9999...
------------------------------
9x = 9.0000000

divide both sides by 9:

x = 1 Q.E.D!

Therefore, if .999... = 1 then this problem you think may be small = mass destruction! For if anything I say is wrong in your eyes, it's still right, because if .999... = 1, then wrong = right, eventually, lol? Fuckers, bend to my will. Wait, I will come back and try to put it all in another language, but I assure you, the message will be the same.

Cheers Tom Hill, I see you doing a little math, problem is both sides should have been divisible by 10, not subtracting the 9. Good try though. Your genius creations allow the math to be kinda slurrrrred. Your genetics are damn good though, hows that haze treating ya?

[Chimera]

Here's the straight dope....

this whole IBL tag that popped up for marketing purposes a few years back did nothing but make a whole generation of newbs and wannabe breeders more ignorant, it set them about chasing a wagon that was heading squarely down the wrong path.

IBL was intended to denote InBred Line. How you inbred the line was moot, the point being that the line underwent intense selection for a specific set of traits.

The absolute fastest and tightest methodology for said task is the self-cross. The problem is that any trait that is the result of a heterozygous gene condition at a specific locus, falls apart in 50% of the progeny. Sure, it may also re-occur in %50 of the resulting as well, but it is by no means stable in those individuals, it's simply present.

The only way to recapitulate the hybrid (Aa) at that locus, is to take the 2x (25% classes, AA and aa) and intermate them to get the desired Aa genetic condition again.

A perfect example of this is the condition that leads to a mixed THC:CBD chemotype; if you self cross a THC:CBD individual, 25% will be CBD 'pure', 50% will recapitulate the hybrid condition (THC:CBD), and a further 25% will be THC 'pure'.

What I'm really getting at here is to back up Tom on a specific point, that the most reliable method for fixing a trait in a line is to cross to a plant that is a KNOWN carrier for that trait, IE- itself. If you were to chose a male sibling from the same population, there is no guarantee that such a male would also possess the same genetic condition that resulted in the trait appearing in your female. However, you KNOW the female possesses said trait, therefor mating the plant to itself is the surefire'est way to re-enforce the trait in the following generation.

The major drawback of this methodology is that you also fix undesirable traits in the line, at a rate of an increase of %50 homozygosity at every generation, therefor you require a serious selection pool to maintain your traits of interest, but purge the traits that are undesirable to the line. While I agree with Tom that the degree to shich you will see issues is very much attributed by the genetic burden hidden within the line, because at this point most cannabis individuals and lines, contain a relatively large genetic burden of undesirable alleles due to the obligate outcrossing nature of the species (coupled with the haphazard mating schemes she's been forced into for decades).

Yes, genetic gain is increased with respect to a very specific locus with each self-cross, but there is also a significant genetic burden placed on populations derived from such pool, to the increasing homozygosity of undesirable alleles @ 50% increase per generation. This is where Tom's families #'d 1-5 come into play... and while 1-5 is simply a number to demonstrate a point, I would suggest that %5 of 500 would be more appropriate to create these families, rather than say 5% of 50 or 100.

This is where IMO lab testing becomes truly advantageous- individuals can be scored on a whole range of traits, like cannabinoid and terpene profile, and evaluated on these characters alone to see if they fit the bill for further selfing or inclusion in the breeding regimen. If you don't have your own lab, this can get really expensive... because it's what we call a "brute force" screening method... it takes a pretty hefty resource budget to be able to screen hundreds of individuals by GC / LC... and a cost which most aren't interested in bearing when suckers line up to toss benjamins at you at trade shows because you told them your OG-blahblah was 30% THC (LOL!).

While you can make some progress SLOWLY by using the methods the naysayers and science-shunning types (from the Everybody a breeder thread) purport, you simply can't achieve the genetic gains associated with proper 'learned' scientific breeding methodologies coupled with solid analytical tools, which again is simply a fact in my world... having access to both methods. To paraphrase our old friend pnwhyb, we've made the same hack crosses years ago, we know it leads to dead ends compared to more appropriate, accepted breeding methods.

It's not just about selfing for homozygosity, it's about knowing what you are doing, understanding all the genetic possibilities, paying attention to phenoypes (chemotypes), and having the skills to read the cues that the genetics are telling you, by following traits/characters and spotting known accepted patterns (1:2:1, 9:3:3:1) when and where they arrise. If you make use of all this information, you'll be much further ahead of the curve than if you simply follow the 'I like this smell, it makes me feel good' breeding methods espoused by others. I can't emphasize enough that these types of insights are not precluded by developing an understanding of genetics, selection methodologies etc... you can still evaluate plants based on your chosen set of criteria and personal tastes, science doesn't take any of that away... much to the dismay of those trying to shun it as a useful tool in understanding just what the fuck we are trying to do.

-Chimera

[Mr. Lovebuzzed]

things are said, things are done..

what is said? nice theoretical narrative..

what is done? seeds.. tom hill seeds. homozygous or heterozygous? heterozygous. chimera seeds. blue hack crosses. homozygous or heterozygous plants?